• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Open carry question - carrying in a clear purse?

Esanders2008

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
576
Location
Virginia Beach, VA
My wife wanted to know if it is considered open carry if she has a pistol in her CLEAR purse. The gun is visible from the outside. I'm not sure the legality of it though.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
My wife wanted to know if it is considered open carry if she has a pistol in her CLEAR purse. The gun is visible from the outside. I'm not sure the legality of it though.

I don't know why it wouldn't be.
§ 18.2-308. Personal protection; carrying concealed weapons; when lawful to carry; penalty.
A. If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation,
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
I think it would depend very much on what else is in her purse. Which of course brings up the safety suggestion that nothing else be in her purse when the gun is in there. Which brings up the exception of a holster, to properly position the gun.

Sounds to me as if she "wants" to OC but has some hesitation/objection. Women seem to have fewer style "options" for OCing, starting with the lack of a sturdy belt most of the time.

You/your wife might be better off starting a new thread specifically asking the women OCers for advice/tips on how they do it.

stay safe.
 

Esanders2008

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
576
Location
Virginia Beach, VA
I think it would depend very much on what else is in her purse. Which of course brings up the safety suggestion that nothing else be in her purse when the gun is in there. Which brings up the exception of a holster, to properly position the gun.

Sounds to me as if she "wants" to OC but has some hesitation/objection. Women seem to have fewer style "options" for OCing, starting with the lack of a sturdy belt most of the time.

You/your wife might be better off starting a new thread specifically asking the women OCers for advice/tips on how they do it.

stay safe.

You hit the nail on the head, Skid. I'm really proud of her though. We went for a drive down to the oceanfront last night around midnight, and she was OCing with a paddle holster. Except because of the belt, it didn't look to comfy. She also tends to wear a lot of longer tops, so doing the "tuck" wouldn't look exactly right. I'm sure we can figure something out. :D
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
You hit the nail on the head, Skid. I'm really proud of her though. We went for a drive down to the oceanfront last night around midnight, and she was OCing with a paddle holster. Except because of the belt, it didn't look to comfy. She also tends to wear a lot of longer tops, so doing the "tuck" wouldn't look exactly right. I'm sure we can figure something out. :D

If you can find the post, Tess and the girls gave a lot of carry options a while back.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
I let my wife make up her own mind, I try to answer as many questions as she asks. But on this one I have advised her NOT to carry a handgun or any weapon in the purse. Whether concealed or not, IF the purse is snatched, and purse snatches are common, the thief has hit the jackpot. He/she now not only has your belongings, they have your weapons.

But she says she will hold on to her purse really really well. A professional purse snatcher just does not randomly grab, they look for the opportunity. Sooner or later she would be lax, I have seen her many times leave her purse in a cart to walk a couple feet and pick up a item while shopping.

I advise against purse carry period!
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
You hit the nail on the head, Skid. I'm really proud of her though. We went for a drive down to the oceanfront last night around midnight, and she was OCing with a paddle holster. Except because of the belt, it didn't look to comfy. She also tends to wear a lot of longer tops, so doing the "tuck" wouldn't look exactly right. I'm sure we can figure something out. :D

My wife wears her tops not tucked also. She took my Star Super A to the store last night in a belt slide holster. No tuck, but I don't advise that, but it is not my place to tell her no, she is a adult.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
My wife wears her tops not tucked also. She took my Star Super A to the store last night in a belt slide holster. No tuck, but I don't advise that, but it is not my place to tell her no, she is a adult.

Wives are just like us...they wear and learn from the sore spots.:lol:
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
On the matter of the original question...

As we have seen, you can get arrested for anything, whether it is justified or not.

I would suspect that carrying a gun in a clear purse would increase the odds of being arrested and charged with carrying a concealed handgun. Even if a person who takes the time to carefully examine the contents of your purse through the clear side ccould easily see the gun, a LEO could make the argument (which might very well be accepted by a judge) that he saw a purse, and not a gun... and then only later upon closer proximity/observation, did he see the gun.

Does it meet the legal definition? I don't know, but I do know I wouldn't want to pay the 5 figures in legal fees to find out. Since some number of LEOs seem to get a kick out of taking you for the ride, even if they can't win the case, why give such an LEO the opportunity to do just that?

TFred
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
On the matter of the original question...

As we have seen, you can get arrested for anything, whether it is justified or not.

I would suspect that carrying a gun in a clear purse would increase the odds of being arrested and charged with carrying a concealed handgun. Even if a person who takes the time to carefully examine the contents of your purse through the clear side ccould easily see the gun, a LEO could make the argument (which might very well be accepted by a judge) that he saw a purse, and not a gun... and then only later upon closer proximity/observation, did he see the gun.

Does it meet the legal definition? I don't know, but I do know I wouldn't want to pay the 5 figures in legal fees to find out. Since some number of LEOs seem to get a kick out of taking you for the ride, even if they can't win the case, why give such an LEO the opportunity to do just that?

TFred

You got a point there.

As we've learned, in addition to reading the text of the statute or court opinion, one must guesstimate how the costumed thugs might twist things.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Considering purse carry is not really secure, add into it possibly getting arrested, it is not worth it. Black V US, or get a permit, either wear it openly or conceal completely.
 

The Wolfhound

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
728
Location
Henrico, Virginia, USA
I seem to recall

The NAA .22LR revolvers when in a belt buckle (fully openly carried) fail the "open" designation because it discuises the fact that it is a gun. My worry with the clear purse would be that it fall under a similar distinction. That is just my not particularly humble opinion, though.
 

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
It is unsound tactically. I always recommend some level of artificial retention outside of a frantic grasp to retain possession of the firearm. Retention buys time and the ability to raise alarm or judo chop someone.

As for being concealed - Your honor, I saw it was a gun concealed in a clear purse. Officer Superman is a credit to his powers of observation. But remember the Officer T-Rex standard: small brains and short arms. Always a risk of some officer somewhere interpreting the law in some moronic way and obviously against the spirit of the law.

Secondly, there is the issue of the having to keep the purse angled or held in a way to keep from muzzle sweeping someone. All of my holsters are straight up or down or slightly forward angled so the barrel is always pointed toward the ground and the trigger is covered from anything hitting it. I'm not sure how all of this would be satisfied in a clear purse.

I did generalize about T-Rexs, and apologize for any offending therein.
 

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
Secondly, there is the issue of the having to keep the purse angled or held in a way to keep from muzzle sweeping someone.

That's one thing that I've been wondering about since this thread first popped up -- how long it might be before someone claims that they saw the gun in the purse pointed in their (general) direction and makes a claim of brandishing based on that.
 

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
That's one thing that I've been wondering about since this thread first popped up -- how long it might be before someone claims that they saw the gun in the purse pointed in their (general) direction and makes a claim of brandishing based on that.

Getting muzzle swept is one of the things that quickly irritates me like no other.
 

paramedic70002

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
1,440
Location
Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
The biggest proponents of Constitutional CC should be women as OC is often not an option due to women's fashions.

That being said, I think it would be legal. As opposed to, say, wearing a tee shirt that says "I AM CARRYING A CONCEALED FIREARM" since the Code makes no allowance for fair notice. And I wouldn't have a problem with being on the muzzle end as long as there was no hand on the gun. They've got to point somewhere after all.

I've always wanted a clear holster. No reason.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
The biggest proponents of Constitutional CC should be women as OC is often not an option due to women's fashions.

Interesting point paramedic!
At one time it was legal for women and men to carry in hand luggage without a permit.
Henrico didn't care for it and found a woman guilty of concealing despite the Supreme court decision. A tactic they are famous for.

The case was appealed to the Supreme court and they reversed themselves.


Schaaf v. Commonwealth, 220 Va. 429.
Richmond
FRANCES MARIE SCHAAF
V.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
October 5, 1979.

A reversalof defendant's conviction would in effect judicially sanction the carrying of aconcealed weapon by all persons, male and female, who own a shoulder bag or ahandbag. It would render useless the statute now requiring that permission befirst obtained from the court by anyone who desires to carry a concealedweapon.
Respect forand adherence to the rule of stare decisis does not require such a course ofaction on our part. While Sutherland can be distinguished from this case on thefacts, to the extent that there may be a conflict Sutherland is overruled.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
What the heck is that "video" at the bottom of this thread? Looks like a Vegas showgirl at the gun range. I'm intrigued but afraid to click on it.

It's an ad for some gun training place, and it's not always there. I think it's the outfit run by the crazy scientologist who tried to create a municipality out of a housing development that never took off. Folks say the training is good, and that of late the scientology and house selling have taken a quiet back seat. (One of the motels close to there has quite a number of bullet hole patches from folks who were "practicing their draw" or doing "dry fire" exercises.)

Ads mean John and Mike to not have to fund OCDO completely out of their own pockets. It's a curse we must live with.

stay safe.
 
Top